Click here to monitor SSC
SQLServerCentral is supported by Red Gate Software Ltd.
 
Log in  ::  Register  ::  Not logged in
 
 
 
        
Home       Members    Calendar    Who's On


Add to briefcase «««1234»»

These indexes are unused, right? Expand / Collapse
Author
Message
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:32 AM


SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 6:12 AM
Points: 2,694, Visits: 3,388
aurato (11/15/2011)
jared-709193 (11/15/2011)
Can you tell us the primary reason for you wanting to drop these? Are you annoyed with the amount of indexes or are you running out of space? Obviously these indexes were put there for a reason, so one of us cannot give you justification for removing them. If you told us that you know for a fact that these are not required for any queries, then we could say to go ahead and drop them. However, just because they have not been used in 2 months does not mean that that they are not used at all. Many reports from my previous company were run quarterly or yearly. I can guarantee that the indexes required for these reports were not used more than 4 or 1 time a year, respectively. If someone came in there and dropped them with no research into which queries referenced these tables and columns and assumed they were not used at all because it had not been accessed in 11 months, I would have fired him/her on the spot.

Jared


Why stop at a year? Maybe it runs every two years. Maybe it's a decade-ly report. I see your point, but I don't know any way to determine that they're not being used other than finding every single query that accesses this table (i.e. lots) and checking the execution plans of each one.

And I am doing research. This is my research now : /

It seems like the consensus is "don't do it it's not a big deal". But every book I've read says that you suffer performance degradation on inserts for each index that you have. I'm just trying to get to the bottom of this. No need to be hostile and talk about how I'm inches from being justifiably fired.


Now we understand your real concern. You don't want indexes there that are unused because you feel that it may affect performance. Let me ask you this... Are you seeing problems with performance on your inserts?

Jared


Thanks,

Jared
SQL Know-It-All

How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help - Jeff Moden
Post #1206063
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:32 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:20 AM
Points: 271, Visits: 415
jared-709193 (11/15/2011)


Ok, so how do you know those indexes are not being used. The query you gave us is not going to tell you if these are used or not. It only tells you if they have been accessed since the last restart. What if someone used to run a report that they have forgotten about. All of the sudden they remember it and start running it again. My CEO used to ask for a specific report only when the Board of Directors asked for it. Sometimes it was monthly, sometimes it was over a year.


That's exactly why I'm here. Because I wasn't sure and I was asking if this was enough.


The only way to tell if these indexes are used is to determine what accesses the columns that are indexed. Ask developers, search through report code, stored procedures. Nobody here can give you the "ok" to drop these. If you are that concerned about it, talk to a superior and tell them that you are convinced that they are not being used. Then explain that dropping them may affect performance if they are in fact used on something. Save the script for the index, and put it back when someone complains. If your business tolerates that (which one of my previous employers did), then do that. Otherwise, don't try to fix something that isn't broken :)

Jared


I sent an email to the VP of IT before I even made this post, explaining all of that.
Post #1206064
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:33 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 6:13 AM
Points: 20,572, Visits: 9,618
I don't mean to be snippy and that's not my intention.


I guess I'm too tired. Logging off.
Post #1206065
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:34 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:20 AM
Points: 271, Visits: 415
jared-709193 (11/15/2011)

Now we understand your real concern. You don't want indexes there that are unused because you feel that it may affect performance. Let me ask you this... Are you seeing problems with performance on your inserts?

Jared


When any large number of inserts or updates happens on the publication server, replication falls hours behind and kills report performance. I don't know if that's due to insert issues, though. I can't say that I've ever gone "Man that insert took way too long."
Post #1206067
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:35 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:20 AM
Points: 271, Visits: 415
Ninja's_RGR'us (11/15/2011)
I don't mean to be snippy and that's not my intention.


I guess I'm too tired. Logging off.


It's fine. You've been extremely cordial in all my other threads that you've posted in. I didn't know I was striking a nerve here.
Post #1206068
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:37 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 6:13 AM
Points: 20,572, Visits: 9,618
aurato (11/15/2011)
jared-709193 (11/15/2011)

Now we understand your real concern. You don't want indexes there that are unused because you feel that it may affect performance. Let me ask you this... Are you seeing problems with performance on your inserts?

Jared


When any large number of inserts or updates happens on the publication server, replication falls hours behind and kills report performance. I don't know if that's due to insert issues, though. I can't say that I've ever gone "Man that insert took way too long."



Just a PS. Insert can also suffer from LACK of indexes (check the exec plan for table scans for FK checks).
Post #1206069
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:40 AM


SSC-Insane

SSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-InsaneSSC-Insane

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 6:13 AM
Points: 20,572, Visits: 9,618
I think you'd be better off starting a new thread with replication getting 1 hour behind as the title.


You'll get better help that way to solve your real issue .

Usually indexes are not the #1 culprit for this but I don't know how to debug this so I'm useless on that problem.

L8r.
Post #1206070
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:42 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:20 AM
Points: 271, Visits: 415
Ninja's_RGR'us (11/15/2011)
I think you'd be better off starting a new thread with replication getting 1 hour behind as the title.


You'll get better help that way to solve your real issue .

Usually indexes are not the #1 culprit for this but I don't know how to debug this so I'm useless on that problem.

L8r.


I really didn't come here with replication in mind at all. In my head I just wanted to get rid of something if it wasn't being used. I'm a purist I guess.
Post #1206071
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:43 AM


SSCrazy

SSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazySSCrazy

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Yesterday @ 6:12 AM
Points: 2,694, Visits: 3,388
aurato (11/15/2011)
jared-709193 (11/15/2011)

Now we understand your real concern. You don't want indexes there that are unused because you feel that it may affect performance. Let me ask you this... Are you seeing problems with performance on your inserts?

Jared


When any large number of inserts or updates happens on the publication server, replication falls hours behind and kills report performance. I don't know if that's due to insert issues, though. I can't say that I've ever gone "Man that insert took way too long."


Well, let's start with the fact that when you insert data into a replicated table in an array of 1000 records it is replicated as 1000 inserts. Not a set of 1000. So replication can get behind fairly quickly. The indexes are maintained on each individual server and should not affect replication. Also, if your servers are in different locations (WAN) you may want to set it up to pull from the subscriber instead of push. Also, where is your distributor? These things can all affect replication.

As far as the indexes... If I was reasonably sure that these are not being used I would drop them and save the script. If at some point someone complains about the performance of a yearly report, you tell them that there is not an index to help performance on that specific report and that you can help them improve performance by building one. I would always protect myself by being ready to say "well, it did not run that slow last time because there is more data in the table this year than last year. I can probably improve performance with this though." Then create the index and document WHY it was created somewhere.

Jared


Thanks,

Jared
SQL Know-It-All

How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help - Jeff Moden
Post #1206073
Posted Tuesday, November 15, 2011 8:57 AM
SSC Veteran

SSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC VeteranSSC Veteran

Group: General Forum Members
Last Login: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 6:20 AM
Points: 271, Visits: 415
jared-709193 (11/15/2011)
aurato (11/15/2011)
jared-709193 (11/15/2011)

Now we understand your real concern. You don't want indexes there that are unused because you feel that it may affect performance. Let me ask you this... Are you seeing problems with performance on your inserts?

Jared


When any large number of inserts or updates happens on the publication server, replication falls hours behind and kills report performance. I don't know if that's due to insert issues, though. I can't say that I've ever gone "Man that insert took way too long."


Well, let's start with the fact that when you insert data into a replicated table in an array of 1000 records it is replicated as 1000 inserts. Not a set of 1000. So replication can get behind fairly quickly. The indexes are maintained on each individual server and should not affect replication. Also, if your servers are in different locations (WAN) you may want to set it up to pull from the subscriber instead of push. Also, where is your distributor? These things can all affect replication.

As far as the indexes... If I was reasonably sure that these are not being used I would drop them and save the script. If at some point someone complains about the performance of a yearly report, you tell them that there is not an index to help performance on that specific report and that you can help them improve performance by building one. I would always protect myself by being ready to say "well, it did not run that slow last time because there is more data in the table this year than last year. I can probably improve performance with this though." Then create the index and document WHY it was created somewhere.

Jared


I'm pretty bad with replication. So I'll try to explain as best I can. The distributor, which I take to mean the distribution database, is on the subscribing server. The servers are in the same building and LAN. And your second paragraph is what I wanted to do, trying to clear it with my boss.

Also for anyone reading this who's interested in the extra info, I posted the same question on stackexchange at

http://dba.stackexchange.com/questions/7906/determining-that-indexes-on-a-table-are-unused
Post #1206080
« Prev Topic | Next Topic »

Add to briefcase «««1234»»

Permissions Expand / Collapse